We should never adopt the enemy’s language. It unnecessarily concedes him a victory and lessens our ability to think and to argue. Listen to Orwell! I was reminded of this by Dover Beach, who at Twitter points us to the Maverick Philosopher, where that gentleman gives the same admonition.
A phobia is a fear, but not every fear is a phobia. A phobia is an irrational fear. One who argues against the morality of homosexual practices, or gives reasons for opposing same-sex marriage is precisely — presenting arguments, and not expressing any phobia. The arguments may or may not be cogent. But they are expressive of reason, and are intended to appeal to the reason of one’s interlocutor. To dismiss them as an expression of a phobia show a lack of respect for reason and for the persons who proffer the arguments.
Do not say homosexual (or gay; the former word is not preferred among this crowd by all either). The word has admitted use, as in a man who at certain periods in his life imagines or indulges predominately or exclusively in same-sex activities. But this sense has almost disappeared, to be replaced by something like this: a man who is not a man but something else, something superior to men in certain ways, and who imagines, etc. When most hear homosexual they imagine a creature that is exactly the same as a man—equal in every way!—but who is also not a man, a human of a genetically or biologically different sex, a kind of super hero with special powers, and a person who has attained perhaps the highest status anyone can reach in our culture, a Victim.
The old word was sodomite, but this is now seen as highly offensive. It merely means a man who at certain periods of his life imagines or indulges in same-sex activities, but it carries the connotation of sinfulness and disgust. Everybody knows what happened to Sodom and why. And that is unbearable. Still, using it can cause a man’s ears to stop up faster than a commode in a Florida retirement park the morning after Free Hot Dog Day.
You might consider same-sex attracted, but I fear this term will morph in the current homosexual. Best to avoid words classifying a man, and instead write of what he has done. The serious medical literature recognizes this and uses the acronym MSM, which stands for men who have sex with men. This isn’t quite right, since men can only have sex with women. But it’s close, and it captures the “Bs” in “LGBT” as well as the “Gs” and “Ts”.
Don’t say climate change. That term is also meaningful, but only in a sense that has also been forgotten. The old, scientific definition is obvious, but it carried the sensible and true notion that the climate has always changed, always will, and that changes cannot be stopped. The term is now laden with political baggage with the sense the climate is changing solely or mostly because of man, and that any change can be stopped by man. Say global warming instead. They promised global warming, not “climate change.” Make them stick to their promises.
Don’t say sex change or (sex) transitioning. There is and can be no such thing. Sex is fixed. It is not assigned, as some now falsely state. Sex is a biological reality; everything else is fantasy. Sexual intercourse is only between men and women; everything else is a corruption. Do not say trans-man or trans-woman. Instead say mentally ill person or man pretending to be a woman, etc.
Don’t say doctor-assisted suicide. Say hospital- or government-appointed (or assigned) killing, and when speaking of the act say executed or killed.
Don’t say had an abortion. Say killed the life inside her. Don’t in this context say choice. Say chose to kill.
Don’t say budget cut. Say smaller than desired increase in spending, or just spending increase.
Before I ask for your suggestions, let’s give Maverick the last word.
Why does language matter? Because clear thinking matters, and language is the medium of thought.
Why does clear thinking matter? Because clear thinking is truth-conducive.
Why does truth matter? Because living according to the truth is conducive to human flourishing.
How many truthophobes will react negatively to these admonitions? And what are your suggestions?